Web Services Addressing Test Suite Issues List

$Date: 2006/01/04 21:15:06 $

$Revision: 1.23 $

Statistics

testsuite total
active 6 6
postponed 0 0
closed 9 9
duplicate 0 0
total 15 15

Open Issues Summary

id owner title target type
test4 Paul Downey Missing tests for optional faults testsuite
test5 NotUnderstood header in test 1205 testsuite
test12 Paul Downey current tests require application generated fault code testsuite
test13 David Illsley SOAP 1.1 faultcode element is not namespace qualified testsuite
test14 Paul Downey 1106, 1206 have none Address and Refps testsuite
test15 Paul Downey Lack of non-anonymous ReplyTo and Faulto tests testsuite

Closed Issues Summary

id owner title target type
test1 David Illsley Create issues tracking page testsuite
test2 David Illsley 1150 and 1250 missing ReplyTo testsuite
test3 David Illsley 1131 and 1231 appear to be the same testsuite
test6 David Illsley Incorrect XPath value in test 1234 testsuite
test7 Paul Downey XPaths/Messages use wsa:isReferenceParameter, should be wsa:IsReferenceParameter testsuite
test8 Paul Downey soap11:mustUnderstand is '0' or '1' testsuite
test9 David Illsley Coverage of SOAP 1.1 tests testsuite
test10 Paul Downey Testing for Action in Fault messages testsuite
test11 Paul Downey Dispatching on Action or Global Element Declaration testsuite

Detailed Listing

test1 Create issues tracking page testsuite - - closed
Description
Create a page for tracking issues to do with the test suite
Origin
Paul Downey
Owner
David Illsley
Resolution2005-12-09
Page created - shamelessly coppy of main issues page.
test2 1150 and 1250 missing ReplyTo testsuite - - closed
Description
From the test description, it looks like tests 1150 and 1250 are to check the behavior for a non-anonymous ReplyTo message. But neither the XPaths nor the messages contain a ReplyTo field.
Origin
(source)
Owner
David Illsley
Resolution2005-12-12
XPaths added to check that a non-empty, non anonymous ReplyTo address is found in the request messages. 2 new sample messages test1150request.xml and test1250request.xml added which satisfy these XPaths.
test3 1131 and 1231 appear to be the same testsuite - - closed
Description
The descriptions for tests 1131 and 1231 claim that their messages should contain a ReplyTo of anonymous. But neither the XPath expressions nor the provided messages have any ReplyTo fields. (In fact, without these fields test 1231 looks the same as test 1230.) Is this an oversight?
Origin
(source)
Owner
David Illsley
Resolution2005-12-13
XPaths updated to require an anonymous ReplyTo and a MessageID (Per Core 3.2.1). Sample requrest messages changed from message1.xml to message2.xml.
test4 Missing tests for optional faults testsuite - - active
Description
Lack of testcases for optional faults. Need to enumerate the optional faults as feature soap07a soap07b, etc
Origin
(source)
Owner
Paul Downey
test5 NotUnderstood header in test 1205 testsuite - - active
Description
The first XPath in the response message for test 1205 checks for the NotUnderstood element in the SOAP header. But according to the SOAP 1.2 specs (section 5.4.8), implementations SHOULD provide a NotUnderstood header (i.e. they are not REQUIRED to do so). So it seems like an implementation that does not provide this header shouldn't fail the test for this reason.
Origin
David Illsley
test6 Incorrect XPath value in test 1234 testsuite - - closed
Description
It looks like the first XPath for the response in test 1234 should have Key#123456789 (copied from the request header) rather than Fault#123456789 (which doesn't exist in the request header in this testcase).
Origin
David Illsley
Owner
David Illsley
Resolution2005-12-09
XPath updated to reflect correct behaviour and fault message changed to fault2.xml which contains the correct reference parameter.
test7 XPaths/Messages use wsa:isReferenceParameter, should be wsa:IsReferenceParameter testsuite - - closed
Description
Tests: 1232, 1133, 1233, 1234 all include in their XPaths and associated sample messages wsa:isReferenceParameter According to [1] it should be wsa:IsReferenceParameter [1] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2004/ws/addressing/ws-addr-soap.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#additionalinfoset
Origin
David Illsley (source)
Owner
Paul Downey
Resolution2005-12-19
fixed in testcases and example documents. Rebuilt example log and indexes.
test8 soap11:mustUnderstand is '0' or '1' testsuite - - closed
Description
The examples should have SOAP 1.1 mustUnderstand values of '0' or '1' and the XPaths should test for '1' rather than 'cast as xs:boolean = true()'.
Origin
Paul Downey (source)
Owner
Paul Downey
Resolution2005-12-19
fixed in examples, but we still need a SOAP 1.1 version of this test.
test9 Coverage of SOAP 1.1 tests testsuite - - closed
Description
There seem to be far fewer SOAP 1.1 tests than SOAP 1.2 tests, possibly because many of the SOAP 1.2 tests have yet to be blanked out.
Origin
Arun Gupta (source)
Owner
David Illsley
Resolution2005-12-29
I've just filled in most of the blanks wrt SOAP 1.1 tests. I've simply copied and updated the namespaces/sample messages in most cases. I've left out an 1105 as 1205 is so controvertial and it'd be good to check with Hugo before adding it. So, I've added: 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104, 1106, 1107, 1108, 1130, 1134, 1140
test10 Testing for Action in Fault messages testsuite - - closed
Description
Test 1133 doesn't check for an action of http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/fault.
Origin
Arun Gupta (source)
Owner
Paul Downey
Resolution2005-12-20
Added test for action in faults from tests 1133, 1233, 1234 and 1240 added action to example fault messages.
test11 Dispatching on Action or Global Element Declaration testsuite - - closed
Description
The same GED is currently used for the echo operation, this implies for an endpoint which handles echo requests and responses, the implementation must dispatch based upon wsa:action and not the GED.
Origin
(source)
Owner
Paul Downey
Resolution2005-12-21
Made the example messages match the WSDL documents, i.e. echoIn and echoOut as the GED for the echo operation..
test12 current tests require application generated fault code testsuite - - active
Description
Current fault code imposes another requirement on the toolkits to be able to support custom faultcodes from within their application. Out-of-scope for WS-Addressing and it should be a standard code (say client or server).
Origin
Arun Gupta (source)
Owner
Paul Downey
test13 SOAP 1.1 faultcode element is not namespace qualified testsuite - - active
Description
Many of the SOAP 1.1 XPaths and sample messages reference soap11:faultcode but it should simply be faultcode.
Origin
David Illsley
Owner
David Illsley
test14 1106, 1206 have none Address and Refps testsuite - - active
Description
Glen raised the following: It doesn't really make any sense to send an EPR with a "none" address and reference parameters, does it? Tests 1106/1206 have this, and I could see some implementations wanting to prevent it since it's, well, silly. :) If you just want to test serializing RefPs, you can do that with a non-"none" address and it would make more sense.
Origin
Glen Daniels
Owner
Paul Downey
test15 Lack of non-anonymous ReplyTo and Faulto tests testsuite - - active
Description
Glen raises lack of combinations of anonymous and non-anonymous ReplyTo and FaultTo tests, for example, a FaultTo of anonymous with a ReplyTo of a given endpoint.
Origin
Glen Daniels
Owner
Paul Downey